Hi
@tradealot ..."
Isn't the idea of the Canada results to add all the extra PGE etc into the mix to push the $lb of product to a place were it is viable?"
This is where a lot of people don't understand the JORC code and reporting. They don't need the Canadian metallurgicals to report a resource. Those metallurgicals are necessary for the next stage of working out if the resource is viable to mine.
The reported resource is just what's in the ground, nothing to do with if it is mineable or not, further studies are needed to see if you can make a viable mine beyond just resources. The company has the assays and gave them to Entech to report a resource, according to SGQ in July last year..
They still report that existing drilling is not sufficient to report a resource. It always seemed very strange to me that they started a scoping study before they had identified a resource estimate as the SS can only be based on the defined resource, that they don't have!!
A Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) would include all mineralisation Ni, Cu and PGEs.
A few posters have indicated that they might have a resource estimate 'up their sleeve' to be announced at an appropriate time. However this flies in the face of continuous disclosure rules, reporting the opposite in their announcements and being against existing shareholders interests during the last cap raise.
Releasing a resource estimate now, despite continually stating ... "
The completed drilling at the Project is not sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity to support the definition of Mineral Resource and Reserves and the classifications applied under the 2012 JORC code."
... would probably get them into a lot of trouble with the regulators..
Therefore the logical assessment is to take the company's words in the official announcements as accurate, not what people think JP has said at conferences or where ever!!
@tradealot ..."
JP been going on for years the all the extra PGE would double the returns from just a Nickel only resource."
That type of statement by itself is accurate, yet it is what isn't stated that is most interesting. The initial (or maiden) MRE would of course include all PGEs, but if they couldn't be gathered by a viable processing (the Canadian testing) then only the Ni/Cu would be included in any MRE inclusion for the scoping study, which would be a subset of the initial MRE.
They have zero excuses for not declaring an MRE, unless their own statements are accurate (completed drilling not sufficient etc etc). Therefore, Occam's Razor, take the simple explanation from the company as the accurate interpretation, not the nudge, nudge, wink, wink salesmanship hype..
